Comments on: 17 Miracles, More or Less

By: andrew h

andrew h — Mon, 04 Jun 2012 03:04:02 +0000

You’re probably right. I mostly object because I do not want my daughters seeing it and because I have been asked to help set up the equipment to make it happen. I will of course do my calling but it is making me feel like such a tool.

By: Ardis E. Parshall

Ardis E. Parshall — Mon, 04 Jun 2012 02:58:10 +0000

Oh, it’s probably not worthy of a real objection, is it? Maybe you could draft a short paragraph about dramatic license, or about the difference between history and fictionalized history, that whoever is in charge of the program would read?

(Most of your stake youth will probably see the movie sooner or later. Being able to caution them about the problems might be of more value than having them watch the DVD at home where there’s less chance of anybody being able to teach them what they ought to know.)

By: andrew h

andrew h — Mon, 04 Jun 2012 02:37:30 +0000

Our Stake is Showing of “17 Miracles” as a Youth activity at the end of the month of June 2012. I am trying to find a productive way to object to this.

By: Ardis E. Parshall

Ardis E. Parshall — Tue, 03 Jan 2012 01:31:40 +0000

Thanks for leaving that report here, kevinf, noting a few particular points that justify your response to the movie. As you can tell from the last few previous comments, this post is still being found by people who feel compelled to comment, but who don’t seem able to give any reasons for their reaction to the movie.

By: kevinf

kevinf — Tue, 03 Jan 2012 01:11:11 +0000

Well, someone in my family gave us the DVD for Christmas, and we watched it last night with two of my children and their families. I tried to not say anything in advance about the historically questionable items, and afterward discussed with them some of the things I knew to be accurate. I will say that some of my fears were realized; the movie, music, and story seemed to me to be meant to stir up the emotions. I was distressed, but kept mostly quiet about the caveat at the beginning, “based on actual events”. I will admit 17 Miracles was entertaining, and everyone seemed to enjoy it. But several of the questionable miracles mentioned here rang false during the viewing, particularly the pie or pan of bread found after a prayer, and I was also surprised that the focus was on the Willie company, and no mention of the Martin company, even though events were tangled together.

We did have a discussion about Levi Savage and both his opposition to starting so late in the season, and his willingness to go anyway, when he found himself in the minority. I also brought up that claiming that they couldn’t stay in or near Florence as there were no communities within three hundred miles where they could get food or support was completely misleading.

Entertaining, yes, but without being a Scrooge, I’m sure a couple of family members will take away a number of things that are ultimately questionable. I’m sure TC Christensen meant to make a movie, but it has a high probability of taking on a patina of historical truth that is not accurate.

By: Ardis E. Parshall

Ardis E. Parshall — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 15:59:48 +0000

But still no willingness to offer details, eh? Take a hike.

By: DAsh Croft

DAsh Croft — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 15:35:37 +0000

It seems that I have touched the very nerve in you that you touched in me. Keep that smile!

By: Ardis E. Parshall

Ardis E. Parshall — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 19:02:25 +0000

Thanks for stopping by, DAshCroft. It would be of interest — and of greater use to us than unsupported claims — if you had identified which stories appear in the diaries of which family members, especially if those stories and diaries are not generally known to history (e.g., don’t appear in the Mormon Pioneer Overland Trails database). As it is, we have a claim by a pseudonymous stranger to proof of unidentified miracles in unidentified sources created by unidentified people located in unconsultable repositories — not very useful.

But then, I come to a history blog to read *history* and not to leave snide comments about the motives of a reviewer who just may have gone to see the same movie with the same purpose … but was sorely disappointed by the experience.

By: DAsh Croft

DAsh Croft — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 18:32:26 +0000

Several of the stories in this Movie come from the personal diaries of members of my family who were members of the Willie Handcart Co. The movie did a very good job of showing what I read in their own, personal words.
I found it to be a very good movie but I went there to hear their story and not to tear it apart.

By: Ardis E. Parshall

Ardis E. Parshall — Sat, 17 Sep 2011 16:14:57 +0000

Teressa, your comment would be far more helpful if you gave an example or two of what was “very well done” and what your “research” has turned up. A review that says the movie is no worse than any other movie is damning with faint praise, and complaining that I complained about things that were left out is a strawman (what I faulted was not what was left out, but what falsified history by being wrongly inserted). You’re welcome to comment again and this time to identify something about the movie that was positively good. “I absolutely loved the movie!” tells us something about you, but nothing about the movie.